Exploring the benefits of collaborative prewriting in a Thai EFL context

Kim McDonough, Jindarat De Vleeschauwer, William J Crawford

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Although second language (L2) collaborative writing research has demonstrated that texts composed collaboratively are more accurate than individually-written texts, few studies have explored whether collaborative prewriting yields similar benefits. This study investigated whether collaborative prewriting, i.e. interacting with peers during the prewriting phase followed by individual writing, led to higher accuracy, complexity, or analytic ratings than individual prewriting. It also explored the relationship between these text features and student talk during collaborative prewriting. English L2 university students in Thailand (n = 57) were randomly assigned to write a problem and solution paragraph with either collaborative or individual prewriting. Their texts were analysed in terms of accuracy (errors/word) and complexity (coordination and subordination), and were rated using analytic rubrics (content, organization, language). Transcripts of the collaborative prewriting discussions were analysed in terms of the topic of student talk (content, organization, language, task management, off-task talk). The results showed that the collaborative prewriting texts were more accurate and received higher ratings than the individual prewriting texts. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between prewriting time and accuracy. Implications for the use of collaborative prewriting tasks in settings for English as a foreign language (EFL) are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalLanguage Teaching Research
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - May 1 2018

Fingerprint

language
rating
organization
student
foreign language
Thailand
EFL Context
university
management
Language
Rating
time
Peers
English as a Foreign Language
Writing Research
Subordination
Collaborative Writing
Paragraph

Keywords

  • accuracy
  • analytic ratings
  • collaborative prewriting
  • L2 writing
  • peer interaction
  • student talk
  • subordination

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Education
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Exploring the benefits of collaborative prewriting in a Thai EFL context. / McDonough, Kim; De Vleeschauwer, Jindarat; Crawford, William J.

In: Language Teaching Research, 01.05.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{88c9c3aa8fc94a11bb15fd761d039e40,
title = "Exploring the benefits of collaborative prewriting in a Thai EFL context",
abstract = "Although second language (L2) collaborative writing research has demonstrated that texts composed collaboratively are more accurate than individually-written texts, few studies have explored whether collaborative prewriting yields similar benefits. This study investigated whether collaborative prewriting, i.e. interacting with peers during the prewriting phase followed by individual writing, led to higher accuracy, complexity, or analytic ratings than individual prewriting. It also explored the relationship between these text features and student talk during collaborative prewriting. English L2 university students in Thailand (n = 57) were randomly assigned to write a problem and solution paragraph with either collaborative or individual prewriting. Their texts were analysed in terms of accuracy (errors/word) and complexity (coordination and subordination), and were rated using analytic rubrics (content, organization, language). Transcripts of the collaborative prewriting discussions were analysed in terms of the topic of student talk (content, organization, language, task management, off-task talk). The results showed that the collaborative prewriting texts were more accurate and received higher ratings than the individual prewriting texts. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between prewriting time and accuracy. Implications for the use of collaborative prewriting tasks in settings for English as a foreign language (EFL) are discussed.",
keywords = "accuracy, analytic ratings, collaborative prewriting, L2 writing, peer interaction, student talk, subordination",
author = "Kim McDonough and {De Vleeschauwer}, Jindarat and Crawford, {William J}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1362168818773525",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Language Teaching Research",
issn = "1362-1688",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Exploring the benefits of collaborative prewriting in a Thai EFL context

AU - McDonough, Kim

AU - De Vleeschauwer, Jindarat

AU - Crawford, William J

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - Although second language (L2) collaborative writing research has demonstrated that texts composed collaboratively are more accurate than individually-written texts, few studies have explored whether collaborative prewriting yields similar benefits. This study investigated whether collaborative prewriting, i.e. interacting with peers during the prewriting phase followed by individual writing, led to higher accuracy, complexity, or analytic ratings than individual prewriting. It also explored the relationship between these text features and student talk during collaborative prewriting. English L2 university students in Thailand (n = 57) were randomly assigned to write a problem and solution paragraph with either collaborative or individual prewriting. Their texts were analysed in terms of accuracy (errors/word) and complexity (coordination and subordination), and were rated using analytic rubrics (content, organization, language). Transcripts of the collaborative prewriting discussions were analysed in terms of the topic of student talk (content, organization, language, task management, off-task talk). The results showed that the collaborative prewriting texts were more accurate and received higher ratings than the individual prewriting texts. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between prewriting time and accuracy. Implications for the use of collaborative prewriting tasks in settings for English as a foreign language (EFL) are discussed.

AB - Although second language (L2) collaborative writing research has demonstrated that texts composed collaboratively are more accurate than individually-written texts, few studies have explored whether collaborative prewriting yields similar benefits. This study investigated whether collaborative prewriting, i.e. interacting with peers during the prewriting phase followed by individual writing, led to higher accuracy, complexity, or analytic ratings than individual prewriting. It also explored the relationship between these text features and student talk during collaborative prewriting. English L2 university students in Thailand (n = 57) were randomly assigned to write a problem and solution paragraph with either collaborative or individual prewriting. Their texts were analysed in terms of accuracy (errors/word) and complexity (coordination and subordination), and were rated using analytic rubrics (content, organization, language). Transcripts of the collaborative prewriting discussions were analysed in terms of the topic of student talk (content, organization, language, task management, off-task talk). The results showed that the collaborative prewriting texts were more accurate and received higher ratings than the individual prewriting texts. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between prewriting time and accuracy. Implications for the use of collaborative prewriting tasks in settings for English as a foreign language (EFL) are discussed.

KW - accuracy

KW - analytic ratings

KW - collaborative prewriting

KW - L2 writing

KW - peer interaction

KW - student talk

KW - subordination

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85047796361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85047796361&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1362168818773525

DO - 10.1177/1362168818773525

M3 - Article

JO - Language Teaching Research

JF - Language Teaching Research

SN - 1362-1688

ER -